Weeks 2–3 Application Assignment Rubric: Doctoral Research Preparation 70 points available for each Application Assignment .Analysis 35 points maximum Exemplary (32–35 points) Acceptable (25–31 points) Minimal Acceptance (0–24 points) Analysis of topic includes doctoral-level thinking, as exemplified by rigorous assessment of topical themes and the systematic inclusion of required elements and content for the envisioned type of writing. Analysis of topic includes sophisticated thinking, as exemplified by assessment of topical themes and the inclusion of required elements and content for the envisioned type of writing. Analysis is superficial or is not thoroughly applied; themes and content are partially presented but are not assessed. Formatting 15 points maximum Exemplary (13–15 points) Acceptable (11–12 points) Minimal Acceptance (0–10 points) Thoroughly follows the prescribed format for the type of academic writing, including structural elements and a logical flow of ideas. The deliverable represents an exemplary model for the type of writing envisioned. Adheres to the prescribed format for the type of academic writing, including structural elements and a logical flow of ideas. The deliverable represents an acceptable model for the type of writing envisioned. Does not fully follow the format of academic writing expected; lacks some structural elements, or ideas do not flow logically. Contains some deficiencies and does not serve as a viable model for the type of writing envisioned. Adherence to Grammar and Style Guidelines 20 points maximum Exemplary (18–20 points) Acceptable (15–17 points) Unacceptable (0–14 points) Clear, unambiguous writing that includes proper sentence structure, idea development, paragraph development, and grammar. Relatively clear writing that includes proper sentence structure, reasonable idea and paragraph development, or few grammatical errors. Unclear, poorly developed writing that lacks proper sentence structure and idea and paragraph development, or contains numerous grammatical errors. response  papers   1 To  interact  with  history  it  is  necessary  to  be  able  to  identify  and  analyze  different  types  of  sources.   This  involves  working  primarily  with  two  types:  primary  sources  (the  extant  artifacts  and  traces  of   the  past)  and  secondary  sources  (usually  books  and  essays  produced  by  historians  who  are   interpreting  primary  sources).     It  is  not  enough  to  simply  read  the  sources,  however.  Historical  documents  do  not  easily  reveal   their  meanings.  Some  historians  are  such  skilled  writers  that  they  can  mask  weaknesses  in  their   arguments  or  convince  the  reader  that  an  interpretation  may  be  the  correct .

1. Weeks 2–3 Application Assignment Rubric: Doctoral Research
Preparation
70 points available for each Application Assignment
.Analysis
35 points maximum
Exemplary
(32–35 points)
Acceptable
(25–31 points)
Minimal Acceptance (0–24 points)
Analysis of topic includes doctoral-level thinking, as
exemplified by rigorous assessment of topical themes and the
systematic inclusion of required elements and content for the
envisioned type of writing.
Analysis of topic includes sophisticated thinking, as
exemplified by assessment of topical themes and the inclusion
of required elements and content for the envisioned type of
writing.
Analysis is superficial or is not thoroughly applied; themes and
content are partially presented but are not assessed.
Formatting
15 points maximum
Exemplary
(13–15 points)
Acceptable
(11–12 points)

2. Minimal Acceptance (0–10 points)
Thoroughly follows the prescribed format for the type of
academic writing, including structural elements and a logical
flow of ideas. The deliverable represents an exemplary model
for the type of writing envisioned.
Adheres to the prescribed format for the type of academic
writing, including structural elements and a logical flow of
ideas. The deliverable represents an acceptable model for the
type of writing envisioned.
Does not fully follow the format of academic writing expected;
lacks some structural elements, or ideas do not flow logically.
Contains some deficiencies and does not serve as a viable model
for the type of writing envisioned.
Adherence to Grammar and Style Guidelines
20 points maximum
Exemplary
(18–20 points)
Acceptable
(15–17 points)
Unacceptable
(0–14 points)
Clear, unambiguous writing that includes proper sentence
structure, idea development, paragraph development, and
grammar.
Relatively clear writing that includes proper sentence structure,
reasonable idea and paragraph development, or few grammatical

3. errors.
Unclear, poorly developed writing that lacks proper sentence
structure and idea and paragraph development, or contains
numerous grammatical errors.
response
papers
1
To
interact
with
history
it
is
necessary
to
be
able
to
identify
and
analyze
different
types
of
sources.
This

4. involves
working
primarily
with
two
types:
primary
sources
(the
extant
artifacts
and
traces
of
the
past)
and
secondary
sources
(usually
books
and
essays
produced
by
historians
who
are
interpreting
primary
sources).

5. It
is
not
enough
to
simply
read
the
sources,
however.
Historical
documents
do
not
easily
reveal
their
meanings.
Some
historians
are
such
skilled
writers
that
they
can
mask
weaknesses
in
their
arguments
or
convince

6. the
reader
that
an
interpretation
may
be
the
correct
one
even
if
the
evidence
does
not
support
it.
How
do
you
unlock
the
secrets
of
the
past
by
interpreting
historical
documents?
How
do
you

7. tell
if
a
historian
is
effectively
using
evidence
and
making
a
convincing
argument?
How
do
authors’
biases
impact
the
sources?
How
do
you
make
sure
you’re
not
duped?
To
answer
these
questions,
you
need

8. to
develop
habits
of
active
and
critical
reading.
The
reading
response
paper
assignment
is
designed
to
allow
you
to
practice
working
with
a
variety
of
sources,
to
encourage
you
to
develop
habits

9. of
critical
interrogation
of
sources,
and
to
hone
your
skills
of
academic
writing.
Your
task
is
to
complete
two,
minimum
2
page
(500
word),
response
papers
this
semester
that
use
primary

10. sources
to
answer
the
questions.
You
can
choose
which
readings
and
questions
you
would
like
to
write
about
with
the
following
stipulations:
• At
least
one
paper
must
be
submitted
before
exam
1.

11. • The
papers
must
be
submitted
to
the
Assignments
section
of
Blackboard
before
class
as
.doc
or
.docx
on
the
date
listed
and
contain
citations
to
receive
credit.
due
dates
and

12. questions
Aug
31:
Constructing
the
American
Past,
Ch
1
What
were
the
goals
of
the
Ku
Klux
Klan,
and
how
did
their
selection
of
victims
illustrate
them?
Sept
4:
Constructing
the

13. American
Past,
Ch
3
What
key
factors
caused
the
confrontation
at
Wounded
Knee?
Sept
14:
Constructing
the
American
Past,
Ch
2
What
motivated
the
strikers
in
1877?
How
did
their
opponents

14. seek
to
delegitimize
workers’
Assignment
Overview
short
(minimum
2
page,
500
word)
papers
before
October
28.
before
class
on
the
day
the
reading
is
assigned
(uploaded
to
Assignments
in
Blackboard)

15. Practice
interpreting
sources,
supporting
claims
with
evidence,
and
writing
clearly
2
grievances
and
win
support
for
private
business?
Sept
16:
Constructing
the
American
Past,
Ch

16. 4
How
did
Corresca,
Lee,
and
Schneiderman
differ
in
their
memories
of
their
homelands?
In
their
attitudes
toward
America?
In
their
descriptions
of
work?
What
do
you
think
accounted
for
the
differences?

17. Sept
28:
Constructing
the
American
Past,
Ch
5
Why
did
advocates
of
an
overseas
U.S.
empire
(especially
annexation
of
the
Philippines)
believe
it
was
the
best
option
for
the
United
States?
–or-­‐

18. Why
did
opponents
of
U.S.
empire
believe
that
acquiring
overseas
territory
was
undesirable?
Sept
30:
Constructing
the
American
Past,
Ch
6
Should
Upton
Sinclair
and
Margaret
Sanger
be
considered
“progressives”?

19. In
other
words,
in
what
ways
did
Sinclair
and
Sanger
exhibit
or
act
on
concerns
of
the
Progressive
Era?
Oct
7:
Constructing
the
American
Past,
Ch
7
How
did
the
United

20. States
government
and
the
artists
of
wartime
posters
appeal
differently
to
men
and
women
to
persuade
them
to
support
World
War
I?
Oct
16:
Constructing
the
American
Past,
Ch
9
How

21. did
the
Great
Depression
affect
people
in
their
daily
lives?
Oct
28:
Constructing
the
American
Past,
Ch
10
What
do
documents
3-­‐7
suggest
about
the
extent
of
Roosevelt’s
four
freedoms
during
World

22. War
II?
Could
minority
groups
expect
equal
access
to
the
freedoms?
formatting
and
citations
Papers
should
be
typed,
double-­‐spaced,
in
12
point,
Times
New
Roman
font,
with
1
inch
margins.

23. Title
pages
and
works
cited
are
not
necessary,
but
your
paper
must
include
a
creative
title
that
indicates
the
subject
matter
of
your
essay.
Footnotes
should
be
single
spaced
in
10
point,

24. Times
New
Roman
font.
Evidence
and
sources
should
be
cited
using
footnotes
that
conform
closely
to
the
Chicago
Manual
of
Style,
15th
edition.
You
can
find
the
Chicago
guidelines,
with
examples,
here,

25. http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide.html
and
a
guide
here
http://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/DocChicago.html.
The
UCA
Writing
Center
has
prepared
this
helpful
guide:
http://uca.edu/writingcenter/cms-­‐basics/.
Citing
sources
from
a
document
reader
can
be
a
bit
tricky,
but
make
sure
you

26. have
the
following
elements
(if
provided):
Author,
"Document
Title,"
in
Book
Title,
ed.
Editor
(City:
Publisher,
Year),
Page
Number.
If
the
3
source
book
does
not
list
an
author,

27. start
with
the
document
title.
Do
the
best
you
can
with
citations
for
the
response
papers.
Remember
that
a
citation
should
point
your
reader
to
the
precise
page
and
source
in
which
you

28. found
the
information.
To
insert
a
footnote
using
Microsoft
Word
on
a
PC,
click
“References”
and
then
“Insert
Footnote.”
You
can
achieve
the
same
thing
by
using
the
keyboard
shortcut
CTL+ALT+F.
To
insert

29. footnotes
in
previous
versions
of
Word,
click
“Insert,”
“References,”
and
choose
“Footnote.”
The
keyboard
shortcut
CTL+ALT+F
should
also
work
for
versions
prior
to
2007.
Mac
users
click
“Insert”
and
then
“Footnote”
or
cmd+option+f.

30. assessment
A
Paper:
The
author
directly
answered
the
questions.
The
paper
uses
evidence
in
support
of
the
argument,
interpreting
primary
sources
and
evaluating
and
engaging
secondary
sources
where
appropriate.
The
evidence

31. is
appropriate
to
support
the
argument,
and
it
is
analyzed
thoroughly.
The
examples
chosen
are
fitting,
given
the
argument,
and
demonstrate
a
mastery
of
the
material.
There
are
appropriate
citations.
The
paper
shows
clear,

32. forceful,
and
engaging
writing.
It
is
almost
entirely
free
from
grammatical
and
mechanical
errors.
B
Paper:
There
are
answers
to
the
questions,
but
they
are
not
fully
developed.
Use
of
evidence
is

33. adequate,
but
not
outstanding.
Examples
may
be
left
without
sufficient
analysis
or
without
clear
relation
to
the
thesis
statement.
The
writing
is
solid,
but
has
some
flaws.
The
organization
of
the
paper
could

34. be
stronger,
or
the
writing
could
be
improved.
C
Paper:
The
author
attempted
to
answer
the
questions,
but
the
claims
may
not
be
explicit,
do
not
match
the
evidence
presented
in
the

35. paper,
or
need
improvement.
Use
of
evidence
is
acceptable
but
needs
work.
Evidence
may
not
effectively
support
the
claims,
or
different
kinds
of
evidence
would
have
been
better.
There
may
not
be
enough
specific

36. examples
to
support
the
argument.
The
writing
shows
a
basic
grasp
of
general
conventions,
but
has
areas
that
could
be
improved
with
further
editing
and
revising.
D
Paper:
The
paper
lacks

37. coherent
answers
to
the
questions
or
the
evidence
is
weak
or
does
not
support
the
argument.
It
lacks
specific
examples
sufficient
to
fully
explore
the
historical
topic.
The
writing
is
below
average;
it
shows

38. clear
room
for
improvement.
F
Paper:
The
paper
fails
to
meet
the
basic
requirements
of
the
assignment,
shows
a
lack
of
effort,
or
exhibits
an
egregious
amount
of
errors
or
mistakes.

39. Weeks 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 Discussion 1 and Week 7 Discussion 2
Posting and Response Rubric
40 points available for each Discussion
This rubric draws directly on Elements 1, 2, and 3 as described
under “Discussion posting guidelines” in the Syllabus.
Initial Posting
20 points maximum
Exemplary (18–20 points)Acceptable (14–17 points)
Unacceptable (0–13 points)
Clearly identifies specific core concepts and arguments of the
readings; relates core concepts to other course resources and
places them in context of broader issues. Provides an effective,
analytical evaluation of the core arguments in the reading.
Provides effective extension arguments about the readings;
relates implications for practice and/or research, or for future
doctoral study. Provides one or two new interesting, relevant,
and engaging questions, points, or assertions that enhance the
Discussion.
Identifies specific core concepts and arguments of the readings
into a mostly relevant context; relates these to other course
resources. Provides an evaluation of the core arguments in the
reading. Provides general extension arguments about the
readings; relates some implications for practice and/or research,
or for future doctoral study. Provides one or two new
interesting, relevant, and engaging questions, points, or
assertions that encourage the seminar and extend the
Discussion.
Does not identify core concepts/arguments of the readings into a
relevant context, and/or does not provide an evaluation of the
core arguments in the reading. Does not provide extension
arguments about the readings, and/or does not provide elements
that encourage further Discussion.

40. Initial post is made in a timely manner (allowing adequate time
for colleagues to respond).
Initial post is made late in the timeline of the week.
Initial post is made so that colleagues have inadequate time to
respond.
Follow-up Response Postings
10 points maximum
Exemplary (9–10 points)
Acceptable (7–8 points)
Unacceptable (0–6 points)
Extends or constructively challenges colleagues’ postings by
substantively responding to core arguments. Offers an
integrated analysis that includes specific and relevant concepts
from appropriate resources.
Generally extends or challenges colleagues’ postings by
responding to core arguments. Offers an analysis that includes
concepts from appropriate resources.
Does not extend or challenge colleagues’ postings, and/or does
not by respond to core arguments. Does not address core
concepts.
Responds to two or more colleagues in a timely manner
(allowing adequate time for colleagues to read and benefit from
the postings).
Responds to two or more colleagues but posts responses late in
the timeline of the week.
Responds to one colleague very late in the timeline of the week,
or does not post a response.

41. Adherence to Grammar and Style Guidelines
10 points maximum
Exemplary (9–10 points)
Acceptable (7–8 points)
Unacceptable (0–6 points)
Clear, unambiguous writing that includes proper sentence
structure, idea development, and paragraph development,
without grammatical errors.
Relatively clear writing that includes proper sentence structure,
reasonable idea and paragraph development, and few
grammatical errors.
Unclear, poorly developed writing that lacks proper sentence
structure and idea and paragraph development. Numerous
grammatical errors.
Full adherence to APA style and reference requirements.
Adherence to APA style and adherence to APA reference
requirements, with a few exceptions.
Little or no adherence to APA style and little or no adherence to
APA reference requirements.